The Sun. — London, England, 1808-12-08 00:00:00

To a question put to him by Mr.VimSog i whether Mr. D. charged commission upon, the whole amount of the F. upplies, as well on those which be supplied out of his own stores, as on the others--the Gene ral said, be , nuclei - stood so, but the =omit would speak for itself tip: r: that subjed. Being. asked what manner Mr. D. concluded himself in that re , Tett, with- reference to the Barrack Department, , the General answered, that Mr. D. appeared to hun to have fulfilled his engagement correaly, fairly, Ind properly. He conceived Mr. D. to . have aded MAN DON : Printed by 1 ICKAR° Hlaßti , Qf NO.4s Martlett-court , Bow-street; and published by W ILE/Am ARmioaß ScitPPE, South Molted-street, rosvenor—squm i At the Sur-OkrOr No. 112 Strand; where A i n , a mmo/4 o r d trf tor the Patter, / titers. for the Eciihr e &v (post-laid) test be acidrened,,. nppoitiled. %.Icc.i)tcc.l by that icAtt propasect in the i<ffLer which he sent to him, -7.11!ch were to alluw two and a halt pet . cent. yew :is Aetedror procuring these articles; mid Air. D. accoldinsly supplied the &neck Office with seerte, and he was then the only person caho sepelied the. Barrack Od - ict,. in that re'spee:t. He went on actl'n in this character as an Agent, and the 'd decent stores to the tarrack Otlice, without any change taking place, until the year 179 e, 'as treat its the General could recollect : and during all that time Mr. D aeled entirely as an -Agent, and es fares GAierat DqatiCey had any knowledge, acted fairly and honestly ill :that cli*eter during all that period., aed Cen‘iti,:;i to the .Geeeral's perieo atis f:',ction. In the year ,1708 ,there was a change, however, there being alien air ,eitraordinary demand ter articles in the batfackj ,DePartmeht; and during the whole of that time the' shpplies Were very great ; -that time there were not only additional Bar lecke about to be errEled, which, of Course, would requite - additional supplies, but it became also ne (esearYid supply the old ones with many articles, ' beeatt,e those in them were very old, and required leaning, and being very much worn, some of them required to be replaced altogether. All this, to the bet of his recollection, occurred in the year mu. As to supplies to the Barrack Department, general ly speAlog c he never knew any difference in that respect, either before Mr.:D. supplied it, or after- Welds. He then stated' the mode in which the supplies were required, in which generally, a writ- ' ter order 'was given, and the supplies were to be in preparation and every article was to be ready, when it was demanded. The direCtions were given to Mr. D. to supply the Barrack Department gene rally, without au) specific order, but he was peeted to be really to prepare the articles whenever • they were required of him : e as to any specific ar t:eles, when they were to be seat down, he believed the course of toe Office coal to send a written order for the purpose. But Mr. D. acted, in the first in stance, from personal orders front himself ; and it was expecte:4 t hat he should be prepared, without farther notice, with a considerable quantity of any ar ticles that allele be wanted, upon the bate supposi tion that they would be su; but until Mr. D. had supplied the articles, however long they might have been ordered, he couid not expect payment for them; and when they were sent, they were sent at the risk of Mr; De, is en, it they Should happen to be report ed to be unfit fur their purposes by the Office; who had the care of their inspection ; and 'the teturn of them was to be at- the expellee of Mr. D. he believed. ,With respect to the change winch took place in the year 1798, the General stated, it had been represented to tern by Mr. D. that there was a ditheull in getting the articles which were wanted for toe Barrack Department ; and that he, Mr. D. bad an opportunity of supplying these articles from his own stores, which the General permitted him to do. Before that time he never had any such per mission, at least that the General recolietied : at that . time" Mr. D. made a request that he might be permitted to supply those stores, but he did not re coiled that he ever did before. From the begin ning of the year 1798, Mr. D. supplied these to the Earfack Department lien] his own stores. At that time the General rather inclined to-think there was an increased demand for these stores. At the time when these stores Were thus supplied, Mr. D. was hi the habit of sending patterns of the articles he supplied, together with the prices affixed to them, for the purpose of inspe dion. The General was'at the head of the Office, and had several persons in that Department under him; and the charges of these supplies in the ,hitter manner, as well as the supplies themselves, were known to those who had the management of the business under the General in the Office, particularly to Col—Mackenzie, and to a Gentleman of the name of Castlyn, to both which Gentlemen the General Mentioned this sub jeet, aed they were - engaged in assisting him in in spetting the articles,. and to whom he shewed the patterns, and the prices fixed upon them.- Colonel Mackenzie was at the head of the Barrack to which be belonged, and he inspeeted these patterns,- toge ther with the prices; and, of course,, gave his opi nion on them before they were purchased. The General did not know where Colonel Mackenzie new is, he was in England he knew, but where in Engiand he knew not. As to Mr. Castlyn, lie is dead. He, however, communicated to Mr. C. also those patterns and prices, in order to give his judg ment on them, which judgment the General valued very much ; and as to the supply of the articles at that time, he never heard of any instance of failure. The General said, he thought there was a very en larged demand for the supplies at that time. Here the ATTORNEY - GENERAL observed, that the better way no explain it was to shew the re turns. The General then proceeded to state, that there was no disappointment whatever in the supplies in the Barrack Department. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL doubted whether this was a correct evidence in the. absence of the re- turns. Lord ELLl:Nreonoron, Chief Justice, observed, that if General Delancey undertook to speak of it from his memory, it certainly was admissible evi dence; and if it were not true, it might be contra• dkled by the produaiott of documents. Ibis alteration, which took place in 1798, in the sitlation of the Barrack Department, toe General considered as a very important alteration in that . 3upply. He assented to the proposal of Mr. Davison, that he ehould supply the Department from his own stores,- but he considered it as the only alteration in the agreement between him and Mr. D. entered into by their two letters in the years 1794 . and 17g3, which he considered as the basis and tbundation of a!I the transaetions between Government and Mr. D. on this wbject.. beneLially fe'r tire tuUc, and to have a&ed great energy, and o..rrormed every thing with tide• lity that was required of him. He 'conceived hiM to , have ailed. very fairly towards the Public. This was his opinion of Mr. D. at that tithe, and it Was his opinion of him now. He never had any reason to believe that Mr. D. had in any instance whatever anted fraudulently towards the Public, neither had he any reason to suspea that he did. He was so far from thinking Mr. D. a person likely to commit a fraud, that it he were to be replaced in the situation of Barrack-Master-General, and had his choice, he would have zppitipted Mr. D. to the same situation auain • for he 17d seen no reason whatever to alter the confidence reposed in him. He considered Mr. D.'s condua as having been highly beneficial to the Public service t if he had not thought so, he would not have appointed him. General Delancey, cross-examined by the ATTOR NEY-GENERAL, said—That the accounts which he signed were general acci)unts, which Were made up from other accounts, containing particulars; and these accounts, which were brought to himg had been made up of others, which had been inspeaed by other Officers in the Barrack Department ; and those Officers had reported to him, that the pre vious accounts had been examined by them, and that they were all confbrmable to the rules and.regula tions of the Barrack Department ; and he signed the accounts presented to him on the faith and confi dence which he had in the Officers, who reported that every thing was collect. In the accounts ,which he signed no mention was made of any-commission whatever. He knew nothing whatever of those servants of Mr. Davison, in whose names the busi ness of this sale was carried on ; nor should he have signed any account,' had he known it, in which .there was- a charge by Mr. Davison for commission of two and a half per cent. upon goods furnished by himself, that being inconsistent with the spirit of his agreement. • _ John Bowring gave a long account of the connec tion between him and Mr. Davison, and admitted the fictitious manner in which Mr. Davison's vouch ers had been made out ; but thought it a mere mat ter of form, tic. • Had advised Mr. Davison not to charge the two and a half per cent, on goods sold" by himself; and it was agreed that he shbuld call on Mr. Stanbank, to recall an account given in, in the year 1803, on account of an error in it, in : order to alter it and strike out that charge, &c. but Mr. Sranbank would not give him the account, because it had been passed and signed by the Barrack-Mas ter-General. Mr. Stanbank said, this application had been made to him, and that he refused to deliver up the accounts, but nothing was said to him on the sub je& of dedueling this charge of commission for goods sold by the Defendant himself. It appeared further, that on his examination be fore the Committee of Military Inquiry, Mr. Davi son being asked, whether he had any other agree ment with General Delancey, or any thing in the na ture of an. agreement, except that which arose front this letter of General Delancey to him, and his an swer to that letter, said he had no other engage ment. And further, that Mr. Davison had sold a few articles out of his own warehouse, upon which the commission was charged • After this, a vast number of witnesses were called to the charaaer of the Defendant ; and first, The Earl of Moira ; who stated, that he had so high' an opinion of the Defendant, that in the course of tht2 war he had applied - to Mr. Pitt, for leave to make-Mr. Davison Commissary to the Artily which - he was appointed to command; and that, he would not have appointed him to that office, if he had had the least suspicion of his integrity. He found him remarkably delicate in all pecuniary concerns, and he had omitted to take many emoluments to which he was entitled ; and in consequence of such his Lord-. ship's opinion, he had appointed 'Mr, Davison I'rea 7 surer of the Ordnance, and to which Mr. Davison assented, and that from pure principles of publiC spirit, for he did not gain 701. a year by that ap pointment. His Lordship had no idea that Mr. Davison would be guilty of any thing that was fraudulent. Sir Evan Nepead bad known Mr. Davison - ever since the year 1782. Was recommended to him by Sir F. Haldimand, from NoVa Scotia; by a Letter of introduation, and his cenduCt afterwards, in the ser 7 vice of the public, was, as far as the Hon. Baronet had an opportunity of observing it (and he was em ployed in various situations under the Secretary of State) perfedly satisfactory. He Certainly transa&- ed all public business entrusted to his care with punctuality and dispatch. Sir Andrew Hamoud bad known Mr. Davison from the year 1793 or 17g4, and had an opportuni ty of observing how much service_ he had rendered, and how much satisfaction lie bad given to the Board of Admiralty. Sir William Broom had known the Defendant' fifteen years, and thought hi►u incapable of a fraudu lent adion. The Honourable Wellesley Pole had known Mr. Davison since the year 1804 ; knew hirn only as a public man, when he aCled tinder Lord Chatham in Ike Ordnance. He remembered an instance in which Mr. Davison had supplied the Ordnance with a stand of arms for 14,000 men, at fhe price Athich the ma nufaauter bad charged him, which he looked upon as an act of great public spirit. John Martin Leek, Esq. gave Mr. Davison a very high charaacr in several particulars. The Right Honourable Charles Long gave Mr. Davison a good character, having had an opportu nity of knowing a great deal about him,- while Se cretary to the Treasury. Mr. Hunter, a merchant in the city, knew Mr. Davison. eight and thirty years ago ; he came to the Counting-house of this Gentleman when he first came to town—was recniumended by hint to Canada, where he conduct ed himself so well,- that on his re turn, Mr. Hunter renewed his acquaintance with him, and they had transacted a good deal- of business together. Mr. John Cowley had known MT. Davison for much the same length of time as Mr. Hunter had, and formed the same opinion as that Gentleman did of his charaaer. Mr. William SMart had known' Mr, Davison 40 years; was acquaioiod with him particularly in the , . . . basinegs of a banker, and spoke Of him highly as 'A man of inftrity in business. Mr. J. Davidson; who said he was .riO .relation of the Defendant's; for - he spelt hiS name differently,, had known the Defendant between twenty and thirty years; gave him'a good charader us a maxi upright in his dealings. Mr. Alexander Black•had known the Defendant ten years; had known- him in the banking buSinesS, and gave him a very good chara6ter. Mr. Gilpin had known the Defendant 20 years, and gave him a very good character. - Mi. Huskisson,- of the Treasury, gave Mr. Davi son an excellent charatter, as far as he had known him, which was a knowledge derived from his con duCt in the service of Government, while Mr. Jilts kisson was conneeted,•with its_ _ _ Mr. Robert Barclay was called to give the Defend ant a good character but being a quaker, he could not be examined in a criminal case. Mr. Jourdaine, an eminent merchant, had known Mr.Davisou for 18 years, and gave him an excel lent charadter. Mr. DALLAS said, there were many other wit nesses who could give evidence to the same effect. It appeared further, that Mr. Davison, had, in the course of his concerns with the Barrack Depart ment, sent in a supplemental account, stating errors in his former account to the amount of t 5,u001. &c. ; btu although his attention had been called to the subject several titnec he never offered to take off this chargenf 'commission upon the goods which he'had sold himself, instead of buying them as an agent. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL made an able reply ; and called for justice, in the name of the Public, to deter public delinquents. Lord ELLENBORoucti summed up the whole case, and went through all•the evidence,• not because the case was- difficult, but because , it was important to the . Public in the first instance, who should be se cured from peculation ; and to the alendant in the second, whose future prospects might - be.greatly af fetted by it in the event of his conviclion. It was true he had an excellent charaCter„ but charaCter was only useful to turn the scale where it hung in balance. The Defendant's case claimed the atten tion of the Jury, but the interest of the public had at least an equal claim on their attention. Having recite&every I.vord of (he evidence, , and made suit able comments on the most material parts of it, he left the case entirely to the Jury; who retired, and after remaining•out of Court for about five minutes, brought in, their VerdiCl—Guilty. • The ATTORN EY•GENER AL, Mr. GARROW, Mr.• ABBOT, and Mr. RiCAARDSON, were Counsel for the Proecution. - lit. DALLAS, Mr. GEORGE WILSON, Mr. HOL- RoYb, and Mr. HARRISON, for the Defendant. Mr. LITCHFIELD was Solicitor for the ProsectF tion, and Mr. R. WILSON for the Defendant. The trial lasted from nine o'clock in the morning till nearly half after seven in the evening: DECEMBER 6. CHENAUT V. BAYNES, KNT. This was an action against the Wet Dock Com patty, charging them with haying taken into their Ducks 275 puncheons •of brandy . belonging to the Plaintiff, and with_ having kept it so negligently, that the Plaintiff sustained a loss of 509 gallons, tittle . being that deficiency in the quantity between the period when the brandies were gauged by the Ex cise gaugers, and the delivery from the Docks. The Plaintiff insisted that this deficiency was occasioned. by pillage, and that the Dock Company being bound to keep all merchandize secure and safe, were liable to make reparation for the loss. The Dock Com pany, in their defence, endeavoured to show that the deficiency arose from natural causes ; .first, that the brandies were landed on their quays in hot wea titer, and consequently liable to evaporation from - the rays of the sun; and, secondly, that the pun cheons being made of soft Hatuburgh timber, open, and fitli of veins, the liquo7 had exuded through the pores, and a great loss was sustained by leakage. This last point was replied to, by saying, that if the puncheonS were in• the condition stated, it was the • duty of the Doek Company to have given notice of the fad to the Plaintiff, and to have seen that they • were properly coopered.. The Plaintiff, however, was convinced that the imperfect state of the pun cheons was an after-thought, and it would be mon strous, it was said, if it were otherwise, as the Dock Company had, charged the Plaintiff • between 2 and, 3001. for warehousing, coopering, and keeping safe the brandies in question. Another proof of its being. an after-thought was, that the deficiency in some of the puncheons was ten, twelve, and thirteen gal lons, and in others only one; however, as there might. be some loss by leakage, the Plaintiff was in clined to make an. allowance of one gallon in every puncheon, and take .a verdict for the remaining loss. This was considered to be a fair proposal by his Lordship, who said, he wished the Wet D:ick Corn pules to understand, that they were bound to give notice, to the merchants of the hnperfea state of their puncheons and packages; to cooper and pre serve than, if necessary ; and, in short, to give every requisite care and attention the merchandise in their custody should require. The Jury. found, for the Plaintiff for a, deficiency of 275 gallons, and the duty, amounting, to 2201. DOCTOR'S COMMONS, DEC. 7. PEYTON V. PEYTON. This was a suit of nullity of marriage, brought by the Husband against his wife, by reason of minority. From the libel produced,' it appeared that the parties had been married for the period of ten years, and that the marriage was solemnized under a licence obtained on the oath of the husband, the Lady being then only sixteen years of age. The Court (Sir WILLIAM SCOTT) after hearing the learned Civilians on the one side and the other, 'and recapitulatit►g the evidence, was of opinion, that the same did not amount to sufficient proof to• war rant the Court ih coming to the conclusion,- that con sent had not been - given on the Fart of the father; and accordingly dismissed the parties. COUkT OF CHANCERY, Dm 6. DAVIS V. COLLINS. this was a demurrer to a bill of discovery. It appeared, that the Sheriffs of Middlesex were the i'eal Plaintiffs. i'l4yttad seised, iinaer 'an 'ecr. tion against the Duke of Sussex; at the suit Of Davi s ; a quantity of looking 7 glasses, in the shop of t he. ' Defendant, packed Up in boxes, with his Roy al l Highness's name and arms on them. Titer ° been in his aparthiants, but were .sent to the fen:lanes shop to be taken care of. The Sherio sold them tinder the execution, and the Defendant brought an action of trocer, to recover the goods, on which the present Plaintitl's filed—their bill for an injun6,tion to stapthe proceedings in the. Court 0 1 Law, which injunaion was granted. Mr. HAV.T, Counsel for the Defendant, con., tended, - that the Court could - not, in any instancei. oblige a Plaintiff' in an action of Jaw to discl9se . :t i 4 . the Defendant what his case was. If this was al 7' lowed, it would be the means of .introducing a system that would make' it dangerous to ever?' , Plaintiff to attempt to go into a Court, of . Lase` for justice. If theDefenchmit, in this case, did oak, piove, in a Courts of Law, that the goods in goes-' tion were' his property, he would haVe a verdi' , : against him. He could not conceive how that" Court could giv:3 him redress by allowing a bill a discovery ; and, under every circumstance of thc, ' case, he was convinced the Court would allo‘V demurrer. ; Ca ! Sir SAMUEL RoMILLY, Counsel for the Pla.m i contended, that the demurrer should not a be lowed, and that the Defendant should be oblige to answer the -bill of discovery. The D e fentn had acknowledged that part of the goods s‘i zc o i under the execution were the property of his 'T a r a Highness . the Duke of Sussex, and the bill fir,; . him what part was his Royal Highness's propet?,,, Surely he could answer that without comtuit t " . " himself. He was of opinion that the whole Of t - rs ;• property was his; for although it might have be e o originally bought from the Defendant, yet if theire was no regular transfer of it back, it belonged to 1 , 11 .4 . original purchaser. Under these circumstances , r. had not a doubt his Lordship would dismiss the o e murrer. Lord anox observed,.he was of opinion that die) demurrer should not be granted, for it could not i!l`! jure the Defendant, as Plaintiff' at law, if be at swered what part of the property did belong to 11 7 Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex, and it was 1 ,.. 311 3 justice to the Plaintiff that he should, when ll° 114 • no other mode of ascertaining it. ria The demurrer was accordingly not allowed, the Defendant will be obliged to answer the bill° diScovery. On Tuesday evening a Gentleman alightecl his horse, near the end of Bond-street, in os. - t.,P r o f street, and a. decently-dressed youth, 14 yea rs i o age, of-the' name of T owers , th e son of a traties i L t d in Hanway-yard, took charge of the .nnimal , was cautioned not to mount. The yowl], hovs`S. disregarded the caution, and rode the horse o f vendish-square, where the a n i ma l got the bett e, j er him. The boy had got his f ee t i n t he stirror a a tilers, and on being thrown he was dragged Ot i ,io hundred yards by the horse, going at s p ee d, anu head was literally dashed in pieces. On his, 1 / 6 " 0 1 taken up in Oxford -street, there were no 5 1 01 to life. The youth had been sent on an lerraa' Mary-le-bone-lane. g •." DISCOUNT ALLOWED ON LOTTERY Every Purchaser,of Shares of Tickets, arnountiOg Five Pounds and upwards,tv ill, be allowed a Discol ii i at J. WARNER'S Fortunate Office, 10, Cornhill,tiv s ; Capital Prizes to a large amount have been rcc.l l3 ,iv Shares.—The Lottery begins drawinci l . • Tuesday, with superior advantages to any I ' l o o4 Scheme, viz. Two new Prizes of SOO Tickets ‘c° *l' besides Four of 20,0001. Two of 10,0001. ( r 50001. &c. Scc. SHIP NEWS. GRAVESZND, DECEMBLEt 6. Passed by—the George, White, from Gibraltar; . Aa jta; Watts, Tenerife, Bally, and Minerva, Bodie, frog! Speculation, Bolden, and the Ainoycleh, fro 4 P holm. R A' • qtal f t,. Sailed—the Two Friends, Hawkins, for St. . -1 ‘, 6 • Statira, Geer, for Smyrna; and the Valiant, post 4 " merick. 114/IRRIED. On Sattn)laylast, - at Lanharran, Morgan Popkin lat. Esq. of Loitralien, to Miss Jenkins, daughter . Richard Jenkins, .Esq. of Famlnawell, Glatnors'l/I(ingic On Monday last, at 'Fottezidge, Iblin Ede., E sq ; (IWO"' Arms-yard, Coleman-street, to Miss l'iott, of the late John Holt, Esq. of Totteridge, flor ls ' t .l( ol3 ' The same day, I. B. Siaden, Esq. of Kipple " 31 . 1 , ' ," to Etheldred, eldest daughter of Kingsman St. Bj.'""' On Tuesday, at.. St. Andrew's, klolbuta, Charles Esq. of Ely=place, to bliss Yat.s. Abbe; The sane-day, at Mrs.. liethell's seat at W atoll „, 40 1,;L' Charles John Berkeley, M.l). of Licrerley, to Miss "r o ot Harriet l'ennyman, youngest daughter of the late Sir ' Pennyinaii, Bait. 0 Last week, at Bickley Church, Francis Mrs.'ll - imerel, relid of the late Walter Damercl, 's , " Lately, Snach.v::ll, Esq. at the tia, second daughter of the late ikichard Williams, L 44 Finchley. —— - _ .L: I e. D. l4 lat if j Early in September last, in . the island' of Marie _,,,i john Brown, Esq. a native of .13elfast, sad for sodo: , Y'' , / , Merchant in Dur)lin. On the gth of September last, William Santlf.brd,' E 54 -1 41 the Bank of Pennsylvania, and formerly oftbe loner Teta'. Londo n. r'13 04 On the 28th ult. in Thornhaugh•street, john— 'Esq. late of Calcutta. se t'. On the 29th oft. at - Downpatrick, at an advan ced ThOnonias Parkinson, : leg* the zd inst , atWoolw ich, the eldest cLughter o Lin Cleveland, of the Royal Horse Artillery. Lately, Mr, William Bennett, Fanner, of Wick. Ise A few Jays ago, at Crosnoray, near Mwteymore, .':,b,,40 at her brother's, the Rev. Thuodorus Martin, Miss .El l ."''` Martin, aged 9z years. L.,,..1 PRICE 0 ESTI SIOCAS Bank Stock, 236 Navy 5 per Ceut. shut' 4 pet Cent. 82 per Cent. Red. 65i 66 3 per Cent. Con. shut Bank L. Ann. IS I-16th RDAY. India Stock, 1 aaia Isuo u, S. 95• Pr' pf , EKc:,equer !Ails. is. 9 5 ' / linp.Nial 3 pa-Catit•44 61 t: toi k) H E O HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDG .- ( 6, ROW. , o fre• ,I. Morning, 46 min. after ;. 1 Afternoon, if 1rt1,11.... BIIZTY-V. 9 E . . On Tuesday last, the Lady of losepia Timperou. -s- a Upper Harley-strett, of a Daughter. cif 01° (,): the 26th ult. •at Patton, in Galloway, Scotianctoi, seat of William Glendonwyn, of Glentionwyn, his ( 13 i_p, f ur Ales. Scott, wile of William Scott, of Witiipson, ill shire, ola Son. —.--"-.